Gulutzan's unique approach

[FireGilbert]

This season Torts has proven himself to be one of the best coaches in the league. His season in Vancouver looks to just be one of a few blemishes on an otherwise successful career.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Is Tortorella the only NHL coach who abstains from addressing his team after games? If not, then I don't think this really applies as "emulation." By most accounts it is a fairly common tactic.

I'll let Gulutzen answer you:

"I used to go in, I can tell you that, for probably 10 or 12 years of my coaching career. And sometimes you say the right thing, sometimes you say the wrong thing, sometimes you're emotional.

"I worked with John Torterella and he doesn't go in after games. I just felt addressing it the next day was something I picked up on from Torts."

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Again, you are trying to make the argument that, just because of a bad year, his coaching styles are thus somehow invalid.

Every coach, every player, every executive has bad years. That doesn't mean that all of their career-long practices and habits are suddenly wrong or stupid.

Originally Posted by FireGilbert

This season Torts has proven himself to be one of the best coaches in the league. His season in Vancouver looks to just be one of a few blemishes on an otherwise successful career.

I'm arguing that it's very odd to change a life-long coaching pattern based on what you see another coach do in a disastrous season.

And again, have people really looked at Tortorella's coaching history?? His teams' point totals (for seasons where he's coached the entire year) are:

69, 93, 106, 92, 93, 71, 87, 93, 109, 95*, 79, 76.
*(pro rated to 82 game season)

So, if you take 96 points as a general guideline for making the playoffs, that's a grand total of 2 seasons in his entire career that his team was more than, at best, a bubble team!

If that strikes someone as a top coach worth emulating, it's no wonder there are so many people satisfied with Gulutzen this year.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I'll let Gulutzen answer you:

Okay, that's fair. But to the question itself, are Tortorella and Gulutzen unique in this regard? Moreover, I think that given your criticism we should also then ask whether Gulutzen emulates Tortorella in every aspect, or has he picked and chosen his methods from a larger repertoire of coaches? Are there things that he does that are unique?

I think it is a mistake to point to one tactic and to assume its effectiveness on the basis of who does or does not employ it, unless we can actually track this correlation. In this case, I don't think we can.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mike F

...if you take 96 points as a general guideline for making the playoffs, that's a grand total of 2 seasons in his entire career that his team was more than, at best, a bubble team

Why not just track the number of times Tortorella's teams have played in the playoffs? The answer is 8/13, with one championship and one more conference finals appearance. That looks pretty good to me.

If that strikes someone as a top coach worth emulating, it's no wonder there are so many people satisfied with Gulutzen this year.

I don't think this is the reason for people's general satisfaction. Rather, it probably has more to do with how the Flames have performed so far under Gulutzen. At least, this is the reason for my current satisfaction.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Mike F

I'm arguing that it's very odd to change a life-long coaching pattern based on what you see another coach do in a disastrous season.

And again, have people really looked at Tortorella's coaching history?? His teams' point totals (for seasons where he's coached the entire year) are:

69, 93, 106, 92, 93, 71, 87, 93, 109, 95*, 79, 76.
*(pro rated to 82 game season)

So, if you take 96 points as a general guideline for making the playoffs, that's a grand total of 2 seasons in his entire career that his team was more than, at best, a bubble team!

If that strikes someone as a top coach worth emulating, it's no wonder there are so many people satisfied with Gulutzen this year.

You don't have to be Scotty Bowman to have a good idea, system or procedure.

He's an NHL coach - he is doing some things right. Just as every NHL coach is doing some things right. Those things don't become wrong, just because you have a bad season.

Every person who makes it to the pinnacle of their profession, has some good ideas. And conversely, every person that makes it to the pinnacle of their profession has borrowed some ideas from others.

Your hate blinds you.

[Huntingwhale]

I was someone who was critical of GG when I heard he did this. I thought it was dumb and meant he didn't have a handle on the room. I've have no problem admitting I am probably wrong about what I thought, as I have literally no idea what goes on in the dressing room.

A by-product of that style is that it allows the players to take a more active role among themselves when the game ends.

"After tough ones it's on us to hold each other accountable as players," said Giordano. "After wins, we sort of get the music going and have a little bit of fun passing out the hat.

"Most of the time you know how the game goes as players and what needs to be addressed. I like it. We take care of it and move on to the next one."

What I do question though is if that accountability Gio preaches does in fact make it's way around the room. Some stretches the leadership seems non-existent. Other stretches it seems like it plays a big role in how the team plays. Again I have no idea one way or another. But if GG does in fact not address the room after games and leaves it to the leadership group to hold each other accountable, I just hope that in fact does happen.

[Strange Brew]

Talk about going down a rabbit hole. Who cares whether Tortorella is a good coach. The question is whether this is a good idea.

It's pretty much a commonly held management principle that feedback is most effective when delivered in the moment, and starts to lose its effectiveness the more time that passes. There is plenty of time for that to occur during games and practices so personally I don't see a big issue in not talking right after a game. The "moment" is gone by then.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Your hate blinds you.

LOL.

If you'll go back through this thread, you'll see I never said that his choice not to address the team was a bad thing. I don't really care, and am not about to say it's bad just out of blind hatred.

My only emotion in this whole debate is amusement/incredulity that a guy would spend just one season with another coach, see that coach make an enormous mess out of that season both on the ice and off, leading to that other coach being fired after that one season, and decide to change a lifelong pattern to be more like him.

The fact that posters want to strongly defend Gulutzen from even that mild a criticism also has me bemused given, as I've said before, Gulutzen has no track record of any real success as an NHL coach.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Why not just track the number of times Tortorella's teams have played in the playoffs? The answer is 8/13, with one championship and one more conference finals appearance. That looks pretty good to me.

Because if you just look at playoffs vs. not, there's no difference between a coach that consistently leads teams to 93 points and one that consistently leads teams to 105 points. And I think there is a big difference between those two coaches.

More accurate data is better.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mike F

Because if you just look at playoffs vs. not, there's no difference between a coach that consistently leads teams to 93 points and one that consistently leads teams to 105 points. And I think there is a big difference between those two coaches.

More accurate data is better.

More accurate data always is, but that is not how I would characterize your approach.

[handgroen]

Originally Posted by handgroen

you're post #6 and none of the posts before you made a big deal out of this

just sayin'

Originally Posted by AC

In this thread, but many posters have made a huge deal about it in a lot of threads since the news came out.

Originally Posted by btimbit

It's been talked about for weeks

honest mistake, i'm around the board a lot and this is the first i've heard.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Mike F

...My only emotion in this whole debate is amusement/incredulity that a guy would spend just one season with another coach, see that coach make an enormous mess out of that season both on the ice and off, leading to that other coach being fired after that one season, and decide to change a lifelong pattern to be more like him...

This is your characterization; not Gulutzen's. I don't think this was done in an effort "to be more like [John Tortorella]." Gulutzen's reason for taking this approach is eminently rational and makes a lot of sense.

Originally Posted by Glen Gulutzen

"I like to take that emotion out of the end of the game. I'm emotional, the players are emotional, both ways, wins and loses, and look at it from a clear-eyed perspective.

"I used to go in, I can tell you that, for probably 10 or 12 years of my coaching career. And sometimes you say the right thing, sometimes you say the wrong thing, sometimes you're emotional.

"I worked with John Torterella and he doesn't go in after games. I just felt addressing it the next day was something I picked up on from Torts. When you address it the next day you have a clearer mind, you have fresher eyes, you've got perspective. If something made you mad that night and it still makes you mad in the morning you know it must be something serious. A lot of times when you look at the tape it gives you a different perspective. Maybe sometimes you thought someone made a mistake or tried to make a play and you watch it on video you see a little clearer what was actually going on."

If Gulutzen was employing this tactic for the reason you invent, then you would have a point. But he quite explicitly posits a different reason altogether—he is analytical about it. Do you seriously find it incredulous that he strives to be more rational and analytical?

[edslunch]

Given that GG doesn't have a solid NHL track record I'm ok with changing some his long term coaching habits if he thinks it's an improvement

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Mike F

LOL.

If you'll go back through this thread, you'll see I never said that his choice not to address the team was a bad thing. I don't really care, and am not about to say it's bad just out of blind hatred.

My only emotion in this whole debate is amusement/incredulity that a guy would spend just one season with another coach, see that coach make an enormous mess out of that season both on the ice and off, leading to that other coach being fired after that one season, and decide to change a lifelong pattern to be more like him.

The fact that posters want to strongly defend Gulutzen from even that mild a criticism also has me bemused given, as I've said before, Gulutzen has no track record of any real success as an NHL coach.

There's your bias shining through.

The only thing going on here is that most people are saying that, regardless of what you think of Gulutzan, this isn't a reason to criticize him.

But you're trying to spin it as a stupid thing to learn something from Torts, just because the Nucks sucked the year they worked together.

It's a non story.

Stating that it is a non story, does not make a person a Gulutzan apologist.

[Ryan Coke]

Let's be honest, when the team was looking unmotivated, unprepared, and just generally terrible, it makes people question whatever methods the coach is using. The Flames have looked absolutely disorganized and disinterested for extended stretches this season.

When the team is playing well, then for most of us he can do whatever the heck he wants as long as he is getting the results.

I hope the current level of play is sustained, but I had hoped for the same thing in early December. The jury is still very much out for GG.

[activeStick]

I like the reasoning because I do the same in my career and in life. In work, you don't do a post mortem until some time has passed for good reason and in life and relationships, it's usually a better idea to let some time pass before arguing about something. Humans are emotional and when people are emotional, they're not always the most rational.

This style does seem to be problematic in back to back game scenarios though.

As a side note, and not necessarily from this thread specifically, I've observed there are a few posters who seem to feel there's nothing the Calgary Flames management and coaching staff can do wrong lol. Feels a bit Iraqi Information "Ministerey"... Quite funny to jump into threads and see the same drum being beat.

[Erick Estrada]

Love him or hate him, Torts is a good NHL head coach.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Okay, that's fair. But to the question itself, are Tortorella and Gulutzen unique in this regard? Moreover, I think that given your criticism we should also then ask whether Gulutzen emulates Tortorella in every aspect, or has he picked and chosen his methods from a larger repertoire of coaches? Are there things that he does that are unique?

I think it is a mistake to point to one tactic and to assume its effectiveness on the basis of who does or does not employ it, unless we can actually track this correlation. In this case, I don't think we can.

I read on reddit there's a few other coaches that do it. I think Babcock was one

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by activeStick

I like the reasoning because I do the same in my career and in life. In work, you don't do a post mortem until some time has passed for good reason and in life and relationships, it's usually a better idea to let some time pass before arguing about something. Humans are emotional and when people are emotional, they're not always the most rational.

This style does seem to be problematic in back to back game scenarios though.

As a side note, and not necessarily from this thread specifically, I've observed there are a few posters who seem to feel there's nothing the Calgary Flames management and coaching staff can do wrong lol. Feels a bit Iraqi Information "Ministerey"... Quite funny to jump into threads and see the same drum being beat.

No more, and possibly less than the usual suspects on the opposite side of the spectrum who feel they can do no right.